PDA

View Full Version : Historical Trivia


WSUCougar
06-15-2004, 03:37 PM
This is a bit long to read, but I thought it'd make for an interesting "history mystery" of sorts. The extensive quote below is from a speech made in the U.S. House of Representatives. I've deleted a few things that would give it away. If this comes too easy for you, please refrain from posting the answer right away.

The questions are:

(a) Who made this speech?
(b) What prompted it?

MR. SPEAKER:
Some time since a Senator from _____ allowed himself, in an elaborately prepared speech, to offer a gross insult to my State, and to a venerable friend, who is my State representative, and who was absent at the time.

Not content with that, he published to the world, and circulated extensively, this uncalled for libel on my State and my blood. Whatever insults my State insults me. Her history and character have commanded my pious veneration; and in her defence I hope I shall always be prepared, humbly and modestly, to perform the duty of a son. I should have forfeited my own self-respect, and perhaps the good opinion of my countrymen, if I had failed to resent such an injury by calling the offender in question to a personal account. It was a personal affair, and in taking redress into my own hands I meant no disrespect to the Senate of the United States or to this House. Nor, sir, did I design insult or disrespect to the State of _____. I was aware of the personal responsibilities I incurred, and was willing to meet them. I knew, too, that I was amenable to the laws of the country, which afford the same protection to all, whether they be members of Congress or private citizens. I did not, and do not now believe, that I could be properly punished, not only in a court of law, but here also, at the pleasure and discretion of the House. I did not then, and do not now, believe that the spirit of American freemen would tolerate slander in high places, and permit a member of Congress to publish and circulate a libel on another, and then call upon either House to protect him against the personal responsibilities which he had thus incurred. But if I had committed a breach of privilege, it was the privilege of the Senate, and not of this House, which was violated. I was answerable there, and not here. They had no right, as it seems to me, to prosecute me in these Halls, nor have you the right in law or under the Constitution, as I respectfully submit, to take jurisdiction over offences committed against them. The Constitution does not justify them in making such a request, nor this House in granting it. If, unhappily, the day should ever come when sectional or party feeling should run so high as to control all other considerations of public duty or justice, how easy it will be to use such precedents for the excuse of arbitrary power, in either House, to expel members of the minority who may have rendered themselves obnoxious to the prevailing spirit in the House to which they belong.

Matters may go smoothly enough when one House asks the other to punish a member who is offensive to a majority of its own body but how will it be when, upon a presence of insulted dignity, demands are made of this House to expel a member who happens to run counter to its party predilections, or other demands which it may not be so agreeable to grant ? It could never have been designed by the Constitution of the United States to expose the two Houses to such temptations to collision, or to extend so far the discretionary power which was given to either House to punish its own members for the violation of its rules and orders. Discretion has been said to be the law of the tyrant, and when exercised under the color of the law, and under the influence of party dictation, it may and will become a terrible and insufferable despotism.
This House, however, it would seem, from the unmistakable tendency of its proceedings, takes a different view from that which I deliberately entertain in common with many others.
So far as public interests or constitutional rights are involved, I have now exhausted my means of defence. I may, then, be allowed to take a more personal view of the question at issue. The further prosecution of this subject, in the shape it has now assumed, may not only involve my friends, but the House itself, in agitations which might be unhappy in their consequences to the country. If these consequences could be confined to myself individually, I think I am prepared and ready to meet them, here or elsewhere; and when I use this language I mean what I say. But others must not suffer for me. I have felt more on account of my two friends who have been implicated, than for myself, for they have proven that "there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother." I will not constrain gentlemen to assume a responsibility on my account, which possibly they would not run on their own.

Sir, I cannot, on my own account, assume the responsibility, in the face of the American people, of commencing a line of conduct which in my heart of hearts I believe would result in subverting the foundations of this Government, and in drenching this Hall in blood. No act of mine, on my personal account, shall inaugurate revolution; but when you, Mr. Speaker, return to your own home, and hear the people of ___ ___ ___ and they are a great people speak of me as a bad man, you will do me the justice to say that a blow struck by me at this time would be followed by revolution and this I know.

(deleted section)

Now, Mr. Speaker, I have nearly finished what I intended to say. If my opponents, who have pursued me with unparalleled bitterness, are satisfied with the present condition of this affair, I am. I return my thanks to my friends, who have magnanimously sustained me, and felt that it was a higher honor to themselves to be just in their judgment of a gentleman than to be a member of Congress for life. In taking my leave, I feel that it is proper that I should say that I believe that some of the votes that have been cast against me have been extorted by an outside pressure at home, and that their votes do not express the feelings or opinions of the members who gave them.

To such of these as have given their votes and made their speeches on the constitutional principles involved, and without indulging in personal vilification, I owe my respect. But, sir, they have written me down upon the history of the country as worthy of expulsion, and in no unkindness I must tell them that for all future time my self-respect requires that I shall pass them as strangers.

And now, Mr. Speaker, I announce to you and to this House, that I am no longer a member of the ____ Congress.

Wolfpack
06-15-2004, 03:42 PM
I confess, I looked it up in Google because I couldn't remember the names, but I know about the incident and persons involved above.

sabotai
06-15-2004, 03:43 PM
COOL! Madlibs!

"Some time since a Senator from Bumblefuck allowed himself,"

"Nor, sir, did I design insult or disrespect to the State of Emergency."


"Mr. Speaker, return to your own home, and hear the people of you're stupid state and they are a great people speak of me as a bad man,"

"And now, Mr. Speaker, I announce to you and to this House, that I am no longer a member of the FUCKING Congress."

How'd I do? :D

WSUCougar
06-15-2004, 03:44 PM
LOL

Cap Ologist
06-15-2004, 03:45 PM
Ok, I'm stumped, but I'm going to guess Sam Houston, only because I think he actually beat up another Senator or Representative when he was elected from Tennessee.

Wolfpack
06-15-2004, 03:46 PM
Son, the guy would have beat you senseless for manipulating his remarks in such a fashion.

:D

MrBug708
06-15-2004, 04:10 PM
There was a senator from South Carolina who was beaten over the head with a cane, in his own office, by another senator. Can't remember who it was though as I havent taken a history course in a while. I really should major in history, I know too much about it. too bad it doesn't pay.

sabotai
06-15-2004, 04:11 PM
MrBug is right (I think), now we just need the names.

WSUCougar
06-15-2004, 04:12 PM
Very warm, but jumbled.

MrBug708
06-15-2004, 04:19 PM
Sumner is one of the names. I kept wanting to think of the First attack of the Civil War and I finally remembered why. Andrew or John or Charles. Something like that is is first name.

WSUCougar
06-15-2004, 04:20 PM
Charles Sumner, Senator from Massachusetts

MrBug708
06-15-2004, 04:25 PM
He's the one who got clubbed right? BEcause he wasn't from the South or didnt have those views yes?

WSUCougar
06-15-2004, 04:27 PM
He's the one who got clubbed right? BEcause he wasn't from the South or didnt have those views yes?
Correct

judicial clerk
06-15-2004, 04:40 PM
Was the senator who beat him with a cane named calhoun?

NoMyths
06-15-2004, 04:44 PM
No, but I'm staring at a portrait of Calhoun right now.

NoMyths
06-15-2004, 04:45 PM
dola...

(He was beaten by a relative of South Carolina Senator Andrew Butler, House member Preston Brooks)

WussGawd
06-15-2004, 08:16 PM
There was a senator from South Carolina who was beaten over the head with a cane, in his own office, by another senator. Can't remember who it was though as I havent taken a history course in a while. I really should major in history, I know too much about it. too bad it doesn't pay.

Charles Sumner was the beatee...a senator from South Carolina did the beating I believe, but the name has slipped my mind at the moment. It occurred, naturally, in the years leading up to the Civil War.

WSUCougar
06-15-2004, 08:19 PM
The long quote is a speech by South Carolina representative Preston Brooks, who had previously severely beat Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts with a cane in Congress over the slavery issue. The year was 1856.

NoMyths
06-15-2004, 11:00 PM
WussGawd: Four hours after my post and the name still slipped your mind? ;)